Diet, Nutrition and SupplementationPost here for supplement reviews or nutritional advice. If you're trying to get "ripped abz" THIS is where you should be.
Fierce Conversations Part 1: Calories vs. Carbs/Insulin
I admit it, I get sucked into debates and otherwise heated discussions when it comes to anything related to nutrition/exercise. I recently had a back-and-forth with someone over a couple of issues and suggested we move the debate here to draw from the collective wisdom of these boards.
For the time being I will leave the individual’s identity anonymous, but I will say that he is a relatively well-known author with some very hard-lined opinions on diet and exercise. I have invited him to chime in on his opinions and hope that he will come on here and defend his opinions.
My goal here is not to generate support for my views, but to get some more varied, objective perspectives of some of the greatest minds in the field.
Also, I realize that any dietary recommendation should be based on idividual needs and circumstances. I do not subscribe to any one particular dietary pattern.
Here goes;
My Take: Calories do matter (although a calorie is not a calorie per se). Although there are transient and individual physiological differences based on genetics, you have to be in a deficit to lose fat long term.
My evidence: Metabolic ward studies with varying macro compositions.
Miyashita Y, et al. Beneficial effect of low carbohydrate inOct 7, 1971; 285 (15): 827-831.
low calorie diets on visceral fat reduction in type 2 diabetic
patients with obesity. Diabetes Research and Clinical Practice,
Sep, 2004; 65 (3): 235-241.
Golay A, et al. Similar weight loss with low- or highcarbohydrate
diets. American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, Feb,
1996; 63 (2): 174-178.
Stimson RH, et al. Dietary Macronutrient Content Alters
Cortisol Metabolism Independently of Body Weight Changes in
Obese Men. Journal of Clinical Endocrinology & Metabolism,
Grey N, Kipnis DM. Effect of diet composition on the
hyperinsulinemia of obesity. ffice:smarttags[/IMG]New England Journal of Medicine, His Take: It is all about the carbs/insulin response. Many studies have shown that by lowering carbohydrate and even increasing caloric expenditure result in a loss of body weight not solely due to water loss. The metabolic advantage is scientific fact.
His evidence:Carbohydrate restriction has a more favorable impact on the metabolic syndrome than a low fat diet. Volek JS, Phinney SD, Forsythe CE, Quann EE, Wood RJ, Puglisi MJ, Kraemer WJ, Bibus DM, Fernandez ML, Feinman RD.
My response to his evidence: Under certain (mostly transient) conditions, insulin CAN suppress fat oxidation - however under scientific scrutiny, these effects do not develop into chronic effects in hypocaloric conditions. (credit to Alan Aragon here). To wit; Energy restriction improves glycemic control, regardless of a wide range of carb proportions from 15-73% (Freedman, Obes. Res. March 2001.) (I also cited other similar evidence).
Also, metabolic ward studies are the gold standard for control.
What's your take? Your experience? evidence? To what extent do hormones matter vs. calories?
I'm posting here as I'm unable to post links at Fred's site. I think he's actually coming around in the insulin issue, so these studies may be a moot point - but eye-opening all the same.
Diets with differing insulin-inducing properties (fructose, glucose ratios) show no differences in appetite. fficeffice" />
The three replies to this thread only serve to indicate that this forum is inundated with people who have zero interest in science and learning. I will not bother for a second to come here and participate.
The three replies to this thread only serve to indicate that this forum is inundated with people who have zero interest in science and learning. I will not bother for a second to come here and participate.
The first statement made me LOL, as it's drenched in irony.
__________________
Articles | Blog | Pirate my book. "Yeah, but you did your post grad thesis on trolling, so you don't count."
-JP, endorsing how awesome I am
Very Very thorough review –Popular Diets a Scientific Review (that was cited earlier). This is probably the nutrition paper I reference the most often. http://www.toniyancey.com/chs2 34/oct18f.pdf
fficeffice" />
Comparison of the Atkins, Ornish, Weight Watchers, and Zone diets for weight loss and heart disease risk reduction: a randomized trial. Atkins finished last in terms of weight loss (although little differences). http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/si tes/entrez
There is a plethora of solid evidence refuting the nonsensical claims concerning the magical advantages of LC diets.
"His Take: It is all about the carbs/insulin response. Many studies have shown that by lowering carbohydrate and even increasing caloric expenditure result in a loss of body weight not solely due to water loss. The metabolic advantage is scientific fact." Are you serious? This is not a Strawman? Serious!!!
I'm posting here as I'm unable to post links at Fred's site. I think he's actually coming around in the insulin issue, so these studies may be a moot point - but eye-opening all the same.
A big thanks to Alan as this research is well laid out in the AARR.
I'll look these all over but it will take some time. Abstracts are insufficient so I'll have to search for the full texts. If you have the full texts of these please can you place them here. Thanks. Saves time.
Fierce Conversations Part 1: Calories vs. Carbs/Insulin
ffice" />
Linear Mode
